We hear all too often that voters feel they must decide between the
“lesser of two evils”. In part, that is due to the strategic
thinking that must be employed in the Electoral system. It is
also inherant in the process of selecting a vice presidential candidate.

When
a presidential candidate is looking for a running mate, few
considerations will impact the number of feasible choices as much as
geography. Vice Presidential candidates today are picked based on
what they bring to the ticket regionally – they come to the ticket
assuming they will carry their home state and possibly a few around it.
For example North Carolinian John Edwards was selected to be John
Kerry's running mate in 2004 in large part because John Kerry wanted to
increase his competitiveness in the South, a region that had been swept
by George W. Bush four years earlier. With direct election, the
home state advantage will not play a strong role, opening up the option
of selecting the best candidate regardless of geographic
location.

FairVote research is cited in support of the National Popular Vote plan in Indiana, because "every vote cast for president should be equally important and equally coveted, whether it originates in California, Connecticut or Crawfordsville."

FairVote's Rob Richie writes that the Electoral College deepens political inequality, and explains why the National Popular Vote plan is our best opportunity to ensure that every vote for president is equally valued.

Katrina vanden Heuvel, editor of the Nation magazine, highlights FairVote's research in an important piece on the "broad support" growing in the states for the National Popular Vote plan to elect the president.